Home :: FAQ :: Login
Album list :: Last uploads :: Last comments :: Most viewed :: Top rated :: My Favorites :: Search

 


Home > Members galleries > Mazda_Man > Frank's Album
Click to view full size image
Crane fly
Just sitting there on our conservatory, so I guess it had popped in for a session. I duly obliged.
File information
Filename:Crane_fly_1392.jpg
Album name:Mazda_Man / Frank's Album
Keywords:Insects, flies, carne fly
Camera:Nikon D5100
Lens:90mm Tamron f2.8
Aperture:f8
Shutter Speed:1/160sec
Editing Performed:cleane dup the white (dust etc on our conservatory sills.)
ISO:160
File Size:317 KB
Date added:Oct 26, 2014
Dimensions:1386 x 2000 pixels
Displayed:45 times
Color Space:sRGB
Contrast:0
Customer Render:0
Date Time:2014:10:26 10:18:23
DateTime Original:2014:10:25 13:31:09
DateTime digitized:2014:10:25 13:31:09
Digital Zoom Ratio:1
Exif Image Height:2000 pixels
Exif Image Width:1386 pixels
Exif Offset:348
Exif Version:version 2.3
Exposure Bias:0.33333333333333 EV
Exposure Mode:0
Exposure Program:Program
Exposure Time:1/160 sec
FNumber:f 8
File Source:Digital Still Camera
Flash:No Flash
Focal length:90 mm
Gain Control:0
Light Source:Unknown or Auto
Make:NIKON CORPORATION
Max Aperture:f 3.5
Metering Mode:Center Weighted Average
Model:NIKON D5100
Orientation:Normal (O deg)
Resolution Unit:Inch
Saturation:0
Scene Capture Mode:0
Scene Type:Directly Photographed
Sharpness:0
Software:Adobe Photoshop Elements 12.0 Windows
White Balance:0
X Resolution:672.167
Y Resolution:672.167
IPTC Title:
IPTC Copyright:Frank Irwin 2014
IPTC Category:
URL:http://www.thestudio-online.co.uk/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-15810
Favorites:Add to Favorites
Mazda_Man  [Oct 26, 2014 at 10:22 AM]
Being an old "Film" person, will somebody please tell me why when the background is white there are less pixels in the picture and so the size is always smaller. Whenever I take such pics they are always too small to be accepted by sales agencies. One other thing, this macro lens is max aperture f2.8, why does it come up as f3.5? Thanks in advance.
George  [Oct 26, 2014 at 01:52 PM]
Can't answer the questions above Frank sorry
However a smashing macro, excellent detail and the diagonal composition just finishes it off.
Excellent work Sir, well done.
SteveT  [Oct 26, 2014 at 04:47 PM]
Very nice image like it a lot and the white background works well
You often see a large reduction in file size if the image is in JPG which is a lossy comprehension process, if there are large areas of white (or any colour); the algorithm will discard all the white information and produce a very small file.
As to your lens I haven't a clue
Mazda_Man  [Oct 27, 2014 at 09:57 AM]
So as I started in RAW when there is a large mass of white I need to change to perhaps .tif to keep a large file the problem is that Alamy only accept .jpg files. Thanks anyway for the answer.
SteveT  [Oct 27, 2014 at 04:54 PM]
What setting do you use when exporting to JPG? if you are just using the default setting which can be around 75%; try setting the compression ratio to 100%. it could make a difference
Mazda_Man  [Oct 27, 2014 at 05:27 PM]
I emailed Alamy and they said that despite the image being 1.1mb it was Ok because: If you go to "Image" - "resize" - "Image size the block then shows Pixel dimensions 34.7mb. Very strange and no explanation but there you have it. Files it would appear, have a hidden size as well as the one which is easy to see, Now I am even more confused.
Steve I always export in JPG at 100% when using files for sale and also set the PS output to 100% as well. Thanks anyway.
Photojunkie  [Nov 01, 2014 at 12:34 AM]
I suppose you could always bump up the file size to one of the larger sizes if you know you are taking 'white' images? But, as for the image itself... Noooooooo ! There was a time I couldn't open my window at night in the summer because these bloomin' things would just come in!
Mazda_Man  [Nov 01, 2014 at 09:11 AM]
Can't do that Photojunkie, it was taken in RAW so size was maximum possible, much larger than the highest setting in .jpeg which is FINE. If you know a programme for doing that I would love to know about it. Meanwhile the file was accepted on the basis detailed above.
Photojunkie  [Nov 02, 2014 at 11:26 AM]
Oh Frank - sorry - I meant the file size on your camera..! Lol, 'fraid I don't know the 'proper' (?) way of doing this x Babs
Mazda_Man  [Nov 02, 2014 at 01:41 PM]
No problems, what I was attempting to reply with was - the camera setting was set to RAW which is the largest file size that can be had, larger even than the highest .jpeg setting available. File sizes around 70mB are to be had with .jpeg setting but I am in difficulty with measuring the RAW file size. I will sort it out at some point.
CherylAE  [Nov 28, 2014 at 08:11 PM]
I love the simplicity of this image